Some people say cures for cancer and AIDS exist, yet the government keeps it a secret to make money....?

Question

What do you think about this?

Answer 1

My opinion is that CANCER and AIDS have cures but their application may cause other more serious side effects -- e.g., death.

Both diseases are a failure of our immune system to respond properly which brings about the ailment. The closest thing to curing or minimizing the effects of cancer is Soy Bean paste which is known as MISO. I recently saw a documentary on Discovery Channel which stated that MISO soup minimized the effects on the thousands at Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombing.

I understand BOTH cancer and AIDS cannot procreate and multiply without oxygen. Starving these cells by eliminating the oxygen would have the worst side effect which is what? DEATH, right? Well, our bodies also require oxygen to survive. See what I mean. Sometimes the CURE is worst than the ailment.

My 2 cents anyway.

Answer 2

If you keep a cure for a disease that's destroying the population of other countries in your own hands, is that not securing your power over said countries?

Answer 3

If you think about it, this could very well be true. If a a cure for cancer and AIDS were to be discovered and distributed think about the billion dollar medicinal manufacturing companies that would go out of business?  

Answer 4

interesting, interesting, interesting and interesting answers too!

i would have to agree with one of the answerers, the medical industry may stand to lose a lot over a cure for cancer or aids, but then again, there are several other diseases out there that would keep the industry alive.  and accidents happen everyday, people are always sick, i still think the medical industry would fare well.

another thing to consider, if all these people aren't going to be dying any time soon, are we going to be able to compensate for the growing amount of mouths to feed?  

Answer 5

As a Doc. I rather doubt it. It would be too big to keep secret, someone would leak it. The government would have more to gain in good will with a cure. The cure is/has been hard to find because the virus mutates so much. This disease is a nightmare, I know of no healer that would hide anything that would help. Thanks for the question.

Answer 6

first, i don't know where you learned that or where they claimed to have gotten their evidence but i doubt it is reliable.

i don't see how aids and cancer can be profitable to the US government.

if they have found the cure to these things, then someone else will also find it soon, and they will make all the money instead of said government.

you think aids and cancer are profitable? think of the profit the cure is.

honestly i doubt they will ever find a real "cure" for cancer.

AIDS i'm sure they will, and i can't imagine it would be too too far away, some african hookers are immune to it. evolution has already found a cure for humans, or at least an immunization, maybe they could find some type of vaccine.

i don't see the logic where keeping this a secret rather than selling it like hot cakes can be more profitable for anybody... except maybe  to companies that currently supply the medical aid associated with them, and would not be directly associated with the cures. but that's business.

saying the cures will not be sold because other companies will lose money is like saying that bill gates wouldn't have screwed IBM and taken over the personal computer market, because of the billions IBM would lose.

one company does not care of the profits of another. i'm pretty sure most companies looking for a cure for these are private. they don't care who they s***w they just want their research and development to payoff.

and if you think these companies are funded or controlled by the government then all the more reason for the government to release the cures because they would profit directly from the sales. rather than indirectly from being the host government to the company that makes billions by selling a product heavily worldwide, and owns the patents on the cure.

this is how countries make money. making or designing, owning the rights to, things  that are sold elsewhere, take money from elsewhere and put it in your own country.

also i think you find the US government more powerful than it is. or at least those that told you about this do.

and if you don't believe that, then maybe you should get a government that stands to profit from healthy people rather than sick ones. a government that pays for the sick rather then that gets payed for them.

i think this is where the conspiracy comes from. the idea that the US government gets money from sick people rather than spends money on them, so cheaper cure for people is less money for government. but honestly even with such a medical policy, the government stands to profit more i think from a company within it, to sell such a sought after product worldwide. than from the payments of the sick.

the thing with capitalism is that everybody is itching to make what you are willing to buy. if one guy doesn't want it another guy will have it.

if a stove company invented the microwave, they aren't gonna hide it because they don't want to lose sales in stoves or whatever, they're gonna sell it fast before someone else does, so that THEY get the money for it.

so the US would be stupid to hide an american cure, just so than in 4 months from now some german company sells it worldwide and then the us is screwed forever and ends up spending on the cures instead of profiting from them.

Answer 7

There are believable preventions and cures for cancer, e.g. bitter almonds and apricot kernels (these courtesy of Edgar Cayce and the A.R.E.), and MCP (the latter available at http://www.econugenics.com/MCP with the former being sold generically).

The notion of "government" is overgeneralized.  It is more likely that a smaller subdivision of government could control a technology ("The Day after Roswell," Colonel Philip Corso, reputedly blows the whistle on one such operation).

The reason being, there are simply too many caring, conscientious people in government generally, who would love to see cures for cancer, etc. made widely available.

Governments do use e.g. illegal drugs to make money ("Red Cocaine," Dr. Joseph Douglass, documents one such activity), however, the governments control the printing and electronic creation of money supply, aka M, and so that is not so much of a problem.  ("The Creature from Jekyl Island" being an example of how money supply is actually controlled for profit.)

Franklin Roosevelt famously ~ said "If it happens in politics, it likely was planned."  That's insider knowledge.

"Rule by Secrecy," Jim Marrs,

"The True Story of the Bilderberger Group," Daniel Estulin,

"Dr. Mary's Monkey," Edward Haslam, and

"Hope of the Wicked," Ted Flynn, are examples of such shenanigans.

"Casebook on Alternative Three," Jim Keith, is a novel with some truth as well, and Mark Prophet's "The Soulless One" is heuristic.